160 / 462
g a z e t t e
april 1991
under any contract of
insurance,
(b) any pension, gratuity or
other like benefit payable
under statute or otherwise
3.
in consequence of the
death of the deceased,
Section 2 of the Civil
Liability (Amendment) - Act,
1964 provides that where
damages are sought for injury
not causing death account
shall not be taken of:-
(a) any sum payable in
respect of the injury under
any contract of insurance,
(b) any pension, gratuity or
other like benefit payable
under statute or otherwise
in consequence of the
injury.
Perhaps, I should mention,
also, that in an injury case
certain payments received
under the Social Welfare Acts
are expressly deductible from
damages. Section 39 of the
Social Welfare (Occupational
Injuries) Act, 1966 provides
that, irrespective of Section 2
of the Civil Liability (Amend-
ment) Act, 1964, there shall
be deducted from damages
any injury benefit or disable-
ment benefit received during
the five years after the
accident. Section 12 of the
Social Welfare Act, 1984
extended the deductions to
include, in the case of
accidents involving mechani-
cally propelled vehicles,
disability benefit including pay-
related benefit, and invalidity
benefit receivable during the
same five year period.
ACTUARIAL EVIDENCE
In 1972 the Chief Justice in his
judgment in the appeal of
Donnelly -v- Brown
(unreport-
ed), Supreme Court, 15 May
1972, said that he was
satisfied that the Trial Judge
" . . . was right in the
circumstances of the case to
admit actuarial evidence.
Without such evidence the
jury could not be expected
to calculate the deduction
appropriate to be made for
the payment now of wages
that would fall to be paid
over many years stretching
into the future."
In the same case Mr. Justice
FitzGerald said
"While actuarial evidence is
generally properly addressed
in cases where the wage
earner has died or has been
permanently
totally
in-
capacitated from earning
anything, it appears to me
that it is relevant, and
consequently
admissible,
where there is evidence of
diminution in wage earning
capacity either certain or
probable. In the present case
there is dear evidence of a
probable, if not certain,
diminution
of
earning
capacity and the actuarial
evidence is, in my view,
consequently admissible".
In his judgment in the
Reddy
-v- Bates
appeal Mr. Justice
Griffin said
"It has been decided by this
Court in many cases over
the past 20 years that where
future loss of earnings, or a
likelihood of regular neces-
sary payments for medical,
hospital or other expenses,
form a substantial part of a
plaintiff's claim, an actuary
should
give
evidence"
/11983] IR 141, 146 [1984]
ILRM 197, 201).
4. DISCOUNT FOR
CONTINGENCIES
In the
Donnelly -v- Brown
appeal the Chief Justice
remarked
"It is a/so right to observe
that actuarial figures are a
calculation on the basis of
steady loss of wages, and,
where appropriate, some
allowance must be made for
the uncertainties
of the
employment market and of
human health."
In the same appeal Mr.
Justice FitzGerald said
"It should, however, be
appreciated
that
the
actuarial figure is based on
an assumption that the pre-
accident rate of earnings
would have been maintained
for the man's working life
time irrespective of any loss
of earnings from incapacity
due to ill health or to the risk
arising from the condition of
Doyle Court Reporters
Principal:
Áine O'Farrell
Court and Conference Verbatim Reporting
Specialists in Overnight Transcription
2, Arran Quay, Dublin 7. Tel: 722833 or 862097
(After Hours)
'Excellence in (Reporting since 1954
142